Posted
by
samzenpuson Thursday September 22, 2011 @08:16PM
from the more-the-merrier dept.

crookedvulture writes "Add chipmaker Via to the list of companies filing legal suit against Apple. Via owns a number of fundamental technology patents inherited from Centaur, and it's already forced Intel to grant an ongoing x86 license. Via also has a vested interest; CEO Wenchi Chen is married to the head of HTC, which Apple sued for patent infringement last March."

The only people who will get anything out of this are lawyers. Even if Apple is 100% guilty and infringing, a judge would never issue an injunction if it means the death of Apple. All that can happen is they will have to settle resulting in a "reasonable" amount of money exchanged between the two.

That wasn't patent law. The GEM lawsuits were over copyright before it was established in court (in cases such as Lotus v. Borland) that user interface has a thin copyright. Much of it is a method of operation more than it is a pictorial or graphic work, apart from specific graphical elements such as the Aqua buttons. I guess the confusion [pineight.com] between copyright and patent is one reason why Richard Stallman of Free Software Foundation rails against the term "intellectual property" [gnu.org].

""In September 1985, Apple lawyers warned Bill Gates that Windows infringed on Apple copyrights and patents, and that his corporation had stolen Apple's trade secrets. Windows had similar drop-down menus, tiled windows and mouse support as Apple's operating system. Gates decided to make an offer to license features of Apple's OS. Apple agreed and a contract was drawn up. A couple of years later though Bill Gates will have again copyrights inf

Apple is playing a dangerous game. With their very limited range of products, they're much more exposed than most companies. Sue Samsung? Android and tablets are a small fraction of Samsung's business, they'd hardly notice if they were gone - if Apple's iOS were shut down for patent infringement (iPods and iPhones), they'd be screwed. HTC is more dependent on Android, but still has more to fall back on (proportionally) than Apple does.

No, but that's not all that Samsung copied. They made the Galaxy look just like an iPhone 3Gs, right down to the UI and specific colouring and icon style.

There are myriad ways to make a black bezel, rounded corner phone and not make it look like an iPhone 3G - just look at, oh, any other Android phone.

When the tech press says of the Galaxy, before any hints of lawsuits were mentioned "it looks great, but it's awfully like an iPhone" you knew it was only matter of time.

To repeat, it's not one single element that caused the lawsuit - it's all of them combined together.

Making a phone with a black bezel and rounded corners of a specific radius: okMaking a phone with a virtually identical UI to the iPhone: okMaking a phone with a black bezel and rounded corners of a specific radius and adding that identical UI: lawsuit.

The nonsense dismissal by slashdot that this is all about "patenting a rounded rectangle" just makes people look ignorant.

I personally don;t agree with the lawsuit, since it just seems like a waste of resources, but I can certainly see why they decided to go for it, and why they seem to be making headway.

Oh please... why did you have to tell people this? For anyone who keeps claiming someone to have copied Apple Computers' stuff, let them point to evidence and THEN show them their evidence is a lie. This helps them get through their stages of grief faster moving from denial into anger and so on.

Surely Apple did not think that they were the only ones in the market with a patent portfolio.

That's what I've been wondering about. Apple are suing all kinds of mobile device manufacturers left and right in hopes of being able to bar them from markets and to remain on top themselves. But they MUST have known that once they start suing the other big players they'll start pushing back and not only the ones being sued but also all the others too just to ensure that Apple won't win, otherwise Apple would just come after the rest later on. And well, gee, that's exactly what's happening: companies that haven't yet been sued are taking the initiative and suing first. Offense is the best defense and so on.

So what's Apple's angle here? They stand to lose quite a lot of money, and if the sh*t really hits the fan their stuff could be barred from the market and a large portion of their patent portfolio could get invalidated. So is there a plan behind this, or was it just simply we've-grown-so-big-we-think-we-can-do-anything - type of brainfart? I personally believe it's more towards the brainfart - situation here and things just got out of hand, but I suppose we'll see how this giant game of chess plays out.

I don't think Apple expects to permanently ban them from the market. It just wants to keep competitors wrapped up in court cases until Apple can scoop them with its newest offerings. I'm sure it knows full well most of its suits are sheer garbage that ultimately will fail. But ultimately could mean what? 6 to 24 months? Oh my, look at that, the iPad 3 and the iPhone 5 come out in those kinds of Windows, meanwhile the competition has a product to bring to a market but can't because of what amounts of a strategically placed nuisance suit.

Of course, if Apple suddenly finds its own products being delayed in the same manner, or worse, but actual hard technology patents, then yes, they could seriously fuck themselves over. But that's fine. If everyone eventually ends this evil little war in a compromise, the consumer will win. I just hope all sides lose massive amounts of money in the process. Unfortunately, the lawyers will get rich(er).

If everyone eventually ends this evil little war in a compromise, the consumer will win. I just hope all sides lose massive amounts of money in the process. Unfortunately, the lawyers will get rich(er).

I don't understand how you come to this logic. Previously nobody was actively attacking each other with patent suits, Apple let the cat out of the bag, and now pretty much every player now has an extra line item called lawyer-ing up on their expense sheet as well as all future requirements having an additional risk item called "patent violation risk". Any engineer knows that the more requirements you tag on, the more expensive the product will get. But this one is a double-whammy because not only does the engineering team have to design in attempts to avoid/develop patents, but now the lawyer team gets bigger to defend against patent attacks.

All this means is delayed products, less freedom for companies to develop products, and more stand-offs between companies. The consumer is never going to benefit. The products will be delayed or put off of the market. The next generation products will be more expensive. All future products will come with their own awkwardness just because of these patent wars.

Consider this. The top two manufacturers for cameras, Canon and Nikon, don't name their "modes" identically though they should. Canon labels shutter mode "Tv". Nikon labels it "S". Additionally, the exposure bias meters are opposite. Nobody shares lens mounts. Each mfg makes their own. The result? You buy into a set of lenses and if you want to switch you have to sell all of your gear and go buy into a new set of lenses.

Macs and Windows PCs had the same awkwardness too. ctrl+c for windows. cmd+c (alt key location for PCs) for macs.

You can see this sort of non-sense going on everywhere in new technology. ebooks: Amazon kindle's only do kindle drm formats and pdfs, everyone else has their own drm format. All of the streaming video content services and random support with tvs and tv boxes (roku, boxee, apple tv, etc).

It's a giant mess and the consumer definitely isn't winning. The consumer was in an awesome position back when we were still using vhs and cassette tapes. You could take that stupid tape and a gazillion different devices played it from that giant boom box, to the school's cheezy tape player, do your car radio. Same with vhs. These days? Fuck you.

Apple knows this and they're trying to corner the market while they can. They don't want a race to the bottom but that's exactly what would benefit the consumer the most. While they certainly aren't the only company attempting this (sony and bluray, amazon and kindle, etc) they're certainly one of the most significant (ios apps).

Americans are born with a great arrogance. Take MS and how certain it was that when it was gracious enough to offer an OS for mobile devices, the phone companies would come knocking at its door... and they didn't... HTC got their big break as a chosen partner (meaning MS payed them a shit load of money) to make for instance the XDA and HTC used that money to become an android phone maker...

It seems MS at no point was capable of thinking that the entire world was NOT waiting at its feet to release its next b

if they were worried about their IP being stolen, perhaps they should manufacture in their own country... it's not like the USA is in need of more jobs or anything.

Is it sad or funny? Complaining about Apple not manufacturing, when Steve Jobs started Next which did high tech manufacturing in the US, making really, really awesome computers... which people didn't buy because they preferred cheap imported goods and because nobody cared if the DoJ enforced antitrust laws against Microsoft who was breaking the law and undermining competition to prevent innovative companies like Next from being successful. The US had its chance at innovative, US based manufacture and pissed on it. Jobs learned better and went with foreign component suppliers when Next was acquired by Apple.

I suppose that is all geek history. Beyond that it is a sad lot of unrelated crap that makes no logical point.

It certainly has nothing to do with the fact that American companies do not support Americans. But then, they aren't really American companies any more, are they? Except for retail, and steadily shrinking R&D, they don't employ Americans, and they don't pay much in taxes, if anything at all.

Rats deserting a sinking ship, going to where the pickings are better. Apple is no exception.

Most of the "job creators" politicians talk about are owners of companies that, much like apple, create jobs overseas. They are rich, have enough money and pull to avoid getting taxed and contribute to the ridiculous unemployment rates the US has now.

As for the news, it is true that apple has the money to fight these, but you have to understand that it is mostly alone fighting every other single company that produces cell phones. Even if apple has some IPs, they will get burn

The problem with NeXT was not that they were made in the USA, it was that, as you said, they were really really awesome computers. They were graphical UNIX workstations, with high resolution displays. They were definitely not consumer products. This is the difference between the NeXT and Apple philosophies: NeXT wanted to make the best computer possible, Apple wants to make computers that aren't as bad as the competition's products.

Get outside of Taipei and into "Green" territory, and you might learn that many* Taiwanese consider themselves to be... wait for it... Taiwanese. They tend to consider the invading Han Chang Kai Shek and Sun Yat Sen (using Wade-Giles, not Hanyu Pinyin) and their followers to be history they would rather not have been involved with.

Except for the fact that they are the market leader. Name *ONE* mobile company doing better than Apple right now.

They've only sued over things they believe they own, and the courts have agreed with them. They aren't trying to stop HTC or Samsung from making their own products, but they *are* trying to stop them from making products that are too much a clone of Apple's products.

There are plenty of ways to make a multitouch phone and multitouch tablet. Apple chose their style. It's up to everyone else to choose their own as well.

It seems during this economic downturn companies have started throwing caution to the wind in an attempt to ravenously feed on each others still warm carcasses. What you'll end up with is a period of heavily suppressed innovation and increasingly locked down and crippled devices, software and services no one will be willing to part with money for. It's all going to shit!

It seems during this economic downturn companies have started throwing caution to the wind in an attempt to ravenously feed on each others still warm carcasses. What you'll end up with is a period of heavily suppressed innovation and increasingly locked down and crippled devices, software and services no one will be willing to part with money for. It's all going to shit!

Nah, just too many lawyers. Don't make it any more complicated than need be.

It seems during this economic downturn companies have started throwing caution to the wind in an attempt to ravenously feed on each others still warm carcasses.

What warm carcasses? Companies have been reporting massive profits, Apple certainly not the least of them. Companies are sitting on gi-normous piles of cash. Unemployment is high but so are profits. There is a lot of uncertainty (economic, consumer demand, political, healthcare, etc) in the economy so companies are keeping their powder dry and waiting for things to settle down a bit.

All these lawsuits are because we are at a tipping point where PCs are becoming less important and mobile devices are rapi

All these lawsuits are because we are at a tipping point where PCs are becoming less important and mobile devices are rapidly becoming more important. We're simply seeing companies fighting to establish dominance in this new world. Despite the patent system being rather broken, companies pretty much are forced to use every weapon at their disposal. I don't see this changing anytime soon.

Some are forced to counterattack, some choose to start things. It *IS* a choice and they will always choose whatever wrings the most pennies out of people even if they have to destroy the world to do it.

I see this more of a case of people in glass houses throwing stones. Apple cannot be the bully and not expect to eventually have someone stand up to them. Patent trolls will be trolled themselves, it's just how it works out. However, the number of patent and copyright trolls is definitely increasing, with even semi-respectable companies joining the fray.

It was Apple's mouth writing checks their ass can't cash. Apple is real worried: Android is a real threat to them. Their iDevice market is where their big profits are, they don't have a "what's next" lined up right now and Android is encroaching in a big way. In particular, HTC and Samsung have been since they've smoothed out android's UI and made it even more user friendly (if bloated).

So Apple went all lawsuit happy. They want to suppress any competition. turns out, the competition isn't so happy about that and is hitting back. Hard. In the case of VIA part of it is the relation with HTC, the other part is I'm sure VIA has an interest in the tablet market. VIA has never done well at the high end and so has stopped trying, but they do low end pretty well. Maybe they want in to the tablet market.

Their iDevice market is where their big profits are, they don't have a "what's next" lined up right now

I think you nailed it. Apple led the market in pushing laptops. Their laptop sales passed desktop sales about 2 years before the rest of the market caught up. By the time laptops started to become more of a commodity item, they owned the high-end MP3 player market. Before this started to be eaten by cheaper alternatives, they entered the mobile phone market, where they only have about 5% of the total market but something like 60% of the total profit. That's a common position for Apple, but it's precar

Android is growing tremendously, but it doesn't seem to eat away any of Apple's marketshare. In fact, it looks like a lot of dumbphones are replaced by new Android devices and that Android is eating up Nokia's former share in the smartphone sector.

It's not just you. The fundamental problem is that there is a conflict between global capitalism and the patent regime. The patent regime is hundreds of years old, and developed from the rule of Kings, who could use their power to bestow monopoly rights on their allies in certain areas of production. Think about that - the whole system was based around an exclusive right to manufacture within the boundaries and legal jurisdiction of a single nation. This kind of worked, because the existence of a single leg

Had I known this 10 years ago when I started going to school to get my degree, I'd have gone into pre-law, and be able to retire in just a couple years after a successful career in software patent litigation...

There are two kinds of people in this world -- people who are worth suing and people who aren't. I assume that most SlashDotters fall into the latter category and flame on about it out of jealousy. They should have faith, however, that someday they will hit it big and, YES, get the shit sued out of them. Then they will know that they have arrived . . . in court.

Your line of thinking is the same sort that thinks that Microsoft should be suing Google, the authors of Android, and not HTC/etc.. the manufacturers of Android products that supposedly infringe.

Its like suing Linus because a software shop wrote a program that runs on Linux/x86 that infringes on a patent.. its stupid. ARM doesnt manufacture anything that infringes.. hell, they dont manufacture anything at all.

If ARM was to make these chips, they would license the patents necessary, probably through cross-licensing.

ARM isnt making the infringing chips in question, tho.. Apple is making them and Apple didn't license the patents. Thats why Apple is in some serious trouble this time.

If Apple could hit back at VIA in order to minimize damages, things wouldn't be so bad. Unfortunately for Apple, they dont. Even Intel couldn't defend themselves, and they have truckloads of relevant patents.

No, patents don't prevent transfer of knowledge (the license from ARM). They allow the patent owner to prevent someone else from using the knowledge.

35 U.S.C. 271 Infringement of patent.

(a) Except as otherwise provided in this title, whoever without authority makes, uses, offers to sell, or sells any patented invention, within the United States, or imports into the United States any patented invention during the term of the patent therefor, infringes the patent.

No, Apple licenses the CPU core from ARM, but Apple then integrates this core into its own SoC platform, has the physical chips manufactured by its foundry partner (Samsung!), and - most importantly - sells the product into the marketplace. It's the same reason that SCO targeted Red Hat customers instead of Red Hat, and the same reason Apple targeted Samsung and HTC instead of Google...

Exactly.Apple uses mainboards that are nearly vanilla Intel spec... They just make them a bit smaller than other companies. Who is VIA after? Apple doesn't use hardware different from anybody else... And if VIA already has a license with Intel what is there sueing Intel's customer? Unless they're after nVidia?

Well ol Daryl Mcbide had a "vested interest" in SCO; oh yeah he was also the CEO. CEO's DO NOT NEED A WIFE to make decisions based on emotions or any flitting human trait, they can fuck up just fine on their own.

Not necessarily, it all depends upon the terms that they were licensed under. It wouldn't surprise me if there was some language in the license that allows VIA to revoke the license to use those patents in cases where the licensee is suing allies for allegedly infringing upon their patents.

And unlike trademarks, there is no legal requirement that I know of that a party enforces ones patent protections for them to remain available.

In a galaxy far away, large corporate conglomerates wage battle to gain dominance in the vastness of space. The only hope of survival are a small, but pathetic force of Jedi nerds who resist the insidious marketing ploys and legal shenanigans of these dominating legal war mongrels. Will these Jedi nerds prevail? Stay tuned for continuing episodes of the Phone Wars.

Other quotes:

"These are not the phones you are looking for"

"Apple. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy"

The patent business is completely mad. Eventually (not so far in the future methinks), the world will grind to a halt as everyone will be in court fighting patent cases rather than doing anything productive.

There seems to be a lot of patent lawsuits lately. But how do the companies find out someone is infringing their patents? Do they have engineering teams to take apart their competitors' products, and try to match to their patent portfolio? Or do they just look at the product specs and figure that they have patented the only way something could be done, so the other guys must be infringing?

CEOs should not make decisions based on their wife's occupation... mainly because it is going to be largely emotional...

well, IMO yes and no. VIA get the benefits of a reduced chance of being attacked or dragged down by HTC (/ support / insider knowledge), in exchange for getting involved with battles that HTC get themselves into. i doubt the VIA CEO is taking the choice lightly regardless, but improving relations with a client/business partner based on emotion isn't necessarily a bad thing.

It being emotional decision is largely how the world works anyway and investments / companies aren't any different.

Wen Chi Chen founded VIA Technologies in 1983, and has run the company for almost 30 years, building it from nothing into a billion dollar company that is now the world's largest independent manufacturer of motherboard chipsets. He is the Taiwanese equivalent of Steve Jobs. Under his stewardship VIA successfully defended a patent attack from Intel that led to 11 different court cases in 5 different countries (sound familiar?). The investors don't care about the family connection - they care about profit. And if VIA's patent portfolio was strong enough to convince Intel to settle, then what makes you think Apple will be any different? Intel holds many, many patents on fundamental CPU technologies; how many do you think Apple holds?

Interestingly, they originally filed suit against Intel in part to counter suits Intel had filed against Via. This happened ten years ago [extremetech.com].

So somehow, rather than cross-license rights, VIA ended up with money. And because of that they certainly should feel confident they can get money out of anyone using their patent, rather than being stuck in a profitless cross-license situation.

Everybody but Google banded together. Google was invited to join the same group. The explicit idea was to get them out of the way so no one could use them to sue anyone else. Google is the only one who refused to play along and tried to gain them independently. Shows who is serious about trying to avoid patent fights.

The question is, under what terms? If Google had joined, would it have been able to use the patent pool to protect its Android partners from lawsuits? It seems very unlikely that Apple would've agreed to a situation where it has to back down on all of its anti-Android lawsuits, or that Microsoft would agree to a situation where it could no longer sue Android manufacturers. And if the patent pool wouldn't protect Android, then what motivation would Google have to join?

The explicit idea was to get them out of the way so no one could use them to sue anyone else.

Since the contractual terms between the Rockstar group members haven't been disclosed, it is impossible to know what the patents will be used for. It's a nice idea that they will only be used defensively, but history has shown that patents are often used otherwise.

A consortium of everybody except Google bid on (and won) those patents. And Google was invited. Everybody else just wanted them off the table. Google was the only one who wanted independent rights to them, presumably for use in their own lawsuits.